In response to Campbell Stuart’s op-ed on December 17

Dear Sir: 

In response to Campbell Stuart’s op-ed on December 17 (“Montreal West's side of barrier dispute”) regarding the Broughton road barricade dispute on the border of Lachine’s Hillcrest neighbourhood, some important facts must be put right.

Firstly, Stuart accuses Hillcrest residents of having “a double standard,” claiming that, “the same protesters” who today oppose Montreal West’s traffic barricade were in 2002 complaining that this traffic was too dangerous for Lachine. Who is he is referring to? I didn’t live in Lachine in 2002 and had nothing to do with the issue then. And most longer-time residents in the Hillcrest neighbourhood were surprised by and opposed to Lachine’s move to take down the seasonal bollards on des Erables Street. There would probably also be widespread support in Lachine today to seeing the des Erables bollards reinstated as an alternative to the Broughton barricade. But it doesn’t seem like Montreal West wants either dialogue or any compromise solutions.

Secondly, Stuart claims that, “the protesters are also incorrect when they claim that the closure denies them safe roads or emergency services.” Actually, all we are doing here is repeating the fire department’s condemnation of the Broughton barricade. Stuart should take up his argument with the fire department, not with us.

Thirdly, Lachine never confirmed that there was “too much traffic” speeding along residential streets as Stuart claims. Both Lachine and Montreal West studied the issue, but none of the traffic studies or traffic counts were ever able to find this alleged ‘excessive’ traffic. Stuart now claims that these studies were “self-serving” and somehow designed not to find the traffic. How curious: the CIMA study in 2002 was conducted by a firm with considerable expertise in traffic matters and commissioned by Montreal West itself (when it was part of Montreal). And if Stuart distrusts those findings, why didn’t he commission another study during the four years that he was mayor of Montreal West? Perhaps the answer is that he knew no reputable traffic consultants could find excessive traffic which did not exist. 

The notion that there was ‘excessive traffic’ on Broughton Rd draws laughter from people on both sides of the current barricade. A Montreal West resident sent a letter to the editor of The Gazette on November 1, noting that, “There has always been some traffic on the hill during rush-hours, but nothing undue; and most of the time the streets have been so quiet that I could have set a proper table for 12 right in the middle of Easton Ave. without interruption.”

Ironically, Stuart accuses us of “taking great liberties with the facts,” yet does not verify his own facts. He tries to contradict the fire department on matters of public safety. He also insists there was excessive traffic without citing any source to substantiate this claim while dismissing all evidence to the contrary.

Yours truly, 

John Symon,

One of the Hillcrest neighbourhood activists

111 Rosewood, Lachine